Saturday 6 July 2013
But, Hilton adds, pulling together a cast of ephemeral chancers, careerists and principled egos requires the patient leadership of an experienced operator, skilful diplomat and inspirational charmer – on which basis, he argues:
Sir James Goldsmith built his Rabble Army from the bottom up, so that it became a popular movement which resonated throughout the whole country over a very short space of time. The Goldsmith wealth and charisma merely facilitated an organic campaigning machine.Attractive though that might be, though, I am not sure I agree. Like Hilton, I too was a candidate for the Referendum Party, and felt the magnetism of the man. In the final analysis though, it was his money that drove the machine. Without that, nothing would have happened.
This is a strategy the Conservatives must adopt to move beyond the Westminster bubble of procedural technicalities and interminable party politicking. The country needs another Jimmy Goldsmith.
However, the campaign also had the merit of being tightly focused on a single issue – the commitment to gaining a referendum promise from the established parties. It was of limited duration and scope, structured on conventional lines around the 1997 general election. We did not have to fight the referendum, with its complex strategy implications.
And it must be remembered that UKIP – then under the leadership of Alan Sked – stood apart. It refused to support the campaign and expelled those who did, thereby splitting the vote. Maybe it was the other way round. Sked wanted Goldsmith to back UKIP, and took his bat home when he didn't. The upshot it that even Goldsmith didn't unite the eurosceptic tribes.
If we could not then fight under a single banner, the chances now are even less. A UKIP under the leadership of Nigel Farage, wedded to the electoral fight for its campaigning model, is not going to support the wider campaign. It is not and never has been an inclusive organisation.
I think, therefore, that we must get used to the idea that we are not going to get unity. Even if another Goldsmith figure was to emerge, I doubt he would have any more success in bringing all the rival factions together than did the real Sir James.
All we can hope for is that the separate, independent groups will agree to a common workable strategy – one that has a chance of winning.
But even then, that does not seem possible. UKIP has its ideas; the Conservatives have theirs; John Mills and his fellow travellers have theirs. The group that has coalesced around this blog, and share its values, have theirs.
That, of course, makes the point. How can we "cooperate on objectives and strategy" when there is not the slightest agreement on what the objectives are and what the strategy should be?
The Conservatives – and many others - want "renegotiation" and a new "relationship" with a "reformed Europe", while staying in the EU. UKIP wants "out" by the most expeditious route, and hang the consequences. Then there are those of us who want a careful, negotiated withdrawal, and the commitment to an ongoing process of redefining our international role, together with a new settlement between the people and the political classes.
Those stances are not only irreconcilable, they are mutually incompatible. From our stance, the Conservative objectives are no better than those embraced by the EU itself. Certainly, the consequences will be the same.
As to UKIP, we see a political party which is now more interested in gaining seats and then office, than it is in pursuing our withdrawal from the EU. Its strategy is such as to ensure that, should we ever have a referendum, we would be bound to lose the "out" vote.
That leaves us – not "principled, pure and right", but dogged pragmatists, struggling to find a way through the maze, looking for a strategy that actually has a chance of working. Show us a way out of the maze, and we will follow. But, speaking for myself, I will follow the flag of no man who wants to lead us further into the thicket – not even if his name is Goldsmith.
Refusal to follow might lose us the campaign, but to do so – just for the sake of unity - will make losing a certainty.
COMMENT THREAD
Richard North 06/07/2013
Posts
